On an Edit Person menu click Media, then on the Media Album click tools/Rearrange media items. There are move up, move down & sort by date buttons at the bottom.
- RootsMagic Forums
- → robertjacobs0's Content
There have been 43 items by robertjacobs0 (Search limited from 22-January 19)
I hope I'm not missing the point here, but doesn't the media album/tools allow one to rearrange the order of exhibits? There's no need to delete and reinstall an item. GedSite seems to pick the exhibits up in the order one has prescribed.
Would it be possible to authorize a willing enthusiast to filter and remove the spam?
It's not just that I abhor Facebook, it's a lot easier to read and follow technical discussions — and perhaps occasionally contribute — on the forum. And, as TomH has said, both images and the like/dislike feature can be authorized for the board.
You can use search and replace for surnames. Once the screen opens, you can choose between "replace" and "replace all." "Replace all" obviously isn't suitable in this case because you evidently have people who kept the original surname.
Unless you have a very large number of people to screen, search & replace is still probably your best bet. RootsMagic won't, AFAIK, descend the ladder.
Another option would be to make a named group consisting of the person who changed the name and all of his descendants. You could export the named group to a new database, make the change globally (i.e., "replace all"), import the people back into the main database and use the merge function to make it all coherent again. The first method looks better to me.
Isn't this a little silly? RootsMagic is castigated if they release nothing and again if they release some but not all, and still again if they don't adhere to a "schedule" established by the pace of their releases. They can't win.
That said, I've believed for years that software companies are insufficiently transparent regarding their plans. RootsMagic isn't alone in being secretive. It seems to be a shibboleth in the industry that disclosure will give competitors an advantage. Since that's the case, there little's point in inveighing against the practice and even less point in criticizing RM8 for its failings before we've seen it.
Did you check the index for the entries of people with missing surnames? RootsMagic, like every other genealogical program, would surely be making unwarranted -- and unwanted -- assumptions by assigning surnames automatically.
The father probably showed up on the pedigree screen as well.
I grant that single names are a problem; there are a few Native Americans in my wife's tree and I've entered their names as surnames. There may be other and better ways of dealing with those names, but I wouldn't expect much help or consistency from Ancestry trees in that regard.
I agree. I've thought -- going back to my TMG days -- that the distinction was artificial. It may have made more sense before Ancestry.com and other internet collections became the dominant research technique.
Similarly, while tracking repositories is suitable for identifying libraries, courthouses and the like, it doesn't really speak to the realities of internet research.
I think the idea is that one would have a "source" -- say a book -- and that subsequent citations of it would only involve typing in a page number.That is, it was supposed to be a time and effort saver. I fear that the source/citation bifurcation has mostly served to confuse thousands of people.
As I look at my own report footnotes I see that most of them can adequately guide researchers, but they are all higgledy-piggledy and inconsistent with one another.
I'm glad to learn that there will be words, and an option to abandon them and just show icons. However, my preference would be to bag the icons and just show text buttons. I hope it's not too late to offer this as an option. It should be a simple change.
I also hope it will be possible to show the icons/text horizontally at the top if the user so wishes.
I open RootsMagic 7.6.1, go to Tools/File Options/Ancestry and click on "Disconnect from Ancestry tree." RootsMagic locks up and I have to use the Task Manager to exit. The task manager reports "RootsMagic not responding." I'm actually not sure whether the Ancestry Tree is actually linked or not.
There's been so much trouble with Ancestry that I'm trying to disassociate RootsMagic completely from them although I plan to continue using Ancestry as a research tool.
I hope it isn't heresy to suggest that the best way to post your research on the web is to abandon Tree Share and use RootsMagic and GedSite together to put up the data in the form you prefer. Ancestry.com could still be used for research, of course. Ancestry Tree Share is rife with API problems, the necessity to bow to their formats, and constant repetitive web hints, many of which are duplicates, irrelevant, or just plain wrong.
It's only necessary to look at this forum's posts to see how much trouble Tree Share has caused and how much of your time and RM's time are wasted because of it.
>>>I believe you are refering to Famiy Historian<<<
Yes, of course. If their next version comes out soon and they have fixed that particular deficiency I'm going to have to make a difficult decision. The absence of italics, in particular, was a deal-breaker for me.
If I'm not mistaken, one of our competitors publishes a lits showing how many of their users have asked for each particular change. One of that program's deficiencies IMO is the want of bold, italic & underlining in the printed reports. Last time I looked that enhancement was very high on the list of desirable changes. Were I using that program I would be confident that the programmers would be considering the change seriously.
I'd like to see the RM8 wish list similarly set up. Users would be given a greater sense of participation and I cannot see that the company would be risking anything by the disclosure of what users are hoping for.
The load on the CPU is sometimes very high when the computer is just booting up and for a few moments afterward. does the slowdown occur after the machine is up for a while as well as when you're just starting?
The Windows task manager can show you the percentages of CPU times that are used by each of the running processes.
I too agree with Vyger's logic, but given that the user can set the sort date to the midpoint of two two end dates if desired, I wouldn't delay the release of RM8 by one microsecond for the proposed change.
Wherever the sort date is set, either by RM or by the user, the date itself will be displayed as entered.
In my own records (between 5800 and 5900 people, n=5851 ), a quick and dirty survey shows fewer than five "between x and y" sort dates which would materially affect the order of events in print reports or on my GedSite web site.